Surgery for cervical stenosis: anterior cervical decompression, corpectomy, and fusion.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Grob D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7571852 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Surgery for cervical stenosis: anterior cervical decompression, corpectomy, and fusion.
European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society 20101001 10
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC3585641 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC3676541 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC3585649 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeMultilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy poses significant challenges in selecting optimal surgical approaches, warranting a comprehensive understanding of their biomechanical impacts. Given the lack of consensus regarding the most effective technique, this study aims to fill this critical knowledge gap by rigorously assessing and comparing the biomechanical properties of three distinct surgical interventions, including anterior controllable antedisplacement and fusion (ACAF), anterior cervical corpectomy decompression and fusion (ACCF), and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). The study offers pivotal insights to enhance treatment precision and patient outcomes.MethodsThe construction of the cervical spine model involved a detailed process using CT data, specialized software (Mimics, Geomagic Studio, and Hypermesh) and material properties obtained from prior studies. Surgical instruments were modeled (titanium mesh, anterior cervical plate, interbody cage, and self-tapping screws) to simulate three surgical approaches: ACAF, ACCF, and ACDF, each with specific procedures replicating clinical protocols. A 75-N follower load with 2 Nm was applied to simulate biomechanical effects.ResultsThe range of motion decreased more after surgery for ACAF and ACDF than for ACCF, especially in flexion and lateral bending. ACCF have higher stress peaks in the fixation system than those of ACAF and ACDF, especially in flexion. The maximum von Mises stresses of the bone-screw interfaces at C3 of ACCF were higher than those of ACAF and ACDF. The maximum von Mises stresses of the bone-screw interfaces at C6 of ACDF were much higher than those of ACAF and ACCF. The maximum von Mises stresses of the grafts of ACCF and ACAF were much higher than those of ACDF. The maximum von Mises stresses of the endplate of ACCF were much higher than those of ACAF and ACDF.ConclusionThe ACAF and ACDF models demonstrated superior cervical reconstruction stability over the ACCF model. ACAF exhibited lower risks of internal fixation failure and cage subsidence compared to ACCF, making it a promising approach. However, while ACAF revealed improved stability over ACCF, higher rates of subsidence and internal fixation failure persisted compared to ACDF, suggesting the need for further exploration of ACAF's long-term efficacy and potential improvements in clinical outcomes.
| S-EPMC10925493 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAnterior cervical corpectomy and fusion are frequently used in the treatment of cervical spinal disease. However, the range of motion (ROM) of the operative level is unavoidably lost due to fusion. This study aims to establish an anterior cervical corpectomy goat non-fusion model and to evaluate the ROM of adjacent and operative levels.Material/methodsSix adult-male goats (in vivo group) and twelve adult-male goat cervical spine specimens (randomly divided equally into intact group or in vitro group) were included. The non-fusion model was established by implanting a novel implant at C4 level. Imagiological examinations for the in vivo group were performed to inspect the position of the implant and spinal cord status. Specimens were harvested six months after the operation. Biomechanical testing was conducted to obtain the ROM in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation at upper adjacent level (C(2-3)), operative levels (C(3-4) and C(4-5)) and at C(2-5). Specimens in the intact group were first tested as intact and then tested as fixed and became the fixation group.ResultsImagiological examinations revealed that the position of the implant and the spinal cord status were good. The specimens in the in vivo and in vitro groups had significantly decreased C(2-3) ROM, increased C(3-4) and C(4-5) ROM and similar C(2-5) ROM compared with the fixation group.ConclusionsThis study presents a novel method for potential non-fusion treatment strategies for cervical spinal disease. However, improvement of this model and additional studies are needed.
| S-EPMC4825879 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designSystematic Review.ObjectivesTo evaluate which cervical deformity correction technique between anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) produces better clinical, radiographic, and operative outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a meta-analysis comparing studies involving ACDF and ACCF. Adult patients with either original or previously treated cervical spine deformities were included. Two independent reviewers categorized extracted data into clinical, radiographic, and operative outcomes, including complications. Clinical assessments included patient-reported outcomes; radiographic evaluations examined C2-C7 Cobb angle, T1 slope, T1-CL, C2-7 SVA, and graft stability. Surgical measures included surgery duration, blood loss, hospital stay, and complications.Results26 studies (25727 patients) met inclusion criteria and were extracted. Of these, 14 studies (19077 patients) with low risk of bias were included in meta-analysis. ACDF and ACCF similarly improve clinical outcomes in terms of JOA and NDI, but ACDF is significantly better at achieving lower VAS neck scores. ACDF is also more advantageous for improving cervical lordosis and minimizing the incidence of graft complications. While there is no significant difference between approaches for most surgical complications, ACDF is favorable for reducing operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay.ConclusionsWhile both techniques benefit cervical deformity patients, when both techniques are feasible, ACDF may be superior with respect to VAS neck scores, cervical lordosis, graft complications and certain perioperative outcomes. Further studies are recommended to address outcome variability and refine surgical approach selection.
| S-EPMC11571742 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designA systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) vs Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion (ACCF) in treating adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy.ObjectiveTo assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of ACDF compared to ACCF.MethodsA literature search was conducted in Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase up to December 2023. Studies included were prospective and observational involving ACDF or ACCF for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software.ResultsTen studies (nine case-control and one RCT) were included. ACDF showed a shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.29, 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.04, P < 0.05), better Cobb angle (SMD = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.74, P < 0.01), and improved T1S (SMD = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.80, P < 0.01). No significant differences were found in upper limb VAS, neck VAS, JOA scores, NDI, fusion rates, C2-7 SVA, total complications, blood loss, and operation time.ConclusionsACDF and ACCF are both effective for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy, with ACDF offering advantages in hospitalization duration and cervical curvature restoration, making it the preferred surgical approach. Further research is needed to validate these findings.
| S-EPMC11559831 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn case of spinal cord compression behind the vertebral body, anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) proves to be a more feasible approach than cervical discectomy. The next step was the placement of an expandable titanium interbody in order to restore the vertebral height. The need for additional anterior plating with ACCF has been debatable and such technique has been evaluated by very few studies. The objective of the study is to evaluate radiographic and clinical outcomes in patients with multilevel degenerative cervical spine disease treated by stand-alone cages for anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF).MethodsThirty-one patients (66.5 ± 9.75 years, range 53-85 years) were analyzed. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the 10-item Neck Disability Index (NDI) were assessed preoperatively and during follow-up on a regular basis after surgery and after one year at least. Assessment of radiographic fusion, subsidence, and lordosis measurement of Global cervical lordosis (GCL); fusion site lordosis (FSL); the anterior interbody space height (ant. DSH); the posterior interbody space height (post. DSH); the distance of the cage to the posterior wall of the vertebral body (CD) were done retrospectively. Mean clinical and radiographic follow-up was 20.0 ± 4.39 months.ResultsVAS-neck (p = 0.001) and VAS-arm (p < 0.001) improved from preoperatively to postoperatively. The NDI improved at the final follow-up (p < 0.001). Neither significant subsidence of the cages nor significant loss of lordotic correction were seen. All patients showed a radiographic union of the surgically addressed segments at the last follow up.ConclusionsApplication of a stand-alone expandable cage in the cervical spine after one or two-level ACCF without additional posterior fixation or anterior plating is a safe procedure that results in fusion. Neither significant subsidence of the cages nor significant loss of lordotic correction were seen.Trial registrationRetrospectively registered. According to the Decision of the ethics committee, Jena on 25th of July 2018, that this study doesn't need any registration. https://www.laek-thueringen.de/aerzte/ethikkommission/registrierung/ .
| S-EPMC8725343 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:To clarify the risk factors for subsidence of titanium mesh cage (TMC) following single-level anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) to reduce subsidence. METHODS:The present retrospective cohort study included 73 consecutive patients who underwent single-level ACCF. Patients were divided into subsidence (n = 31) and non-subsidence groups (n = 42). Medical records and radiological parameters such as age, sex, operation level, segmental angle (SA), cervical sagittal angle (CSA), height of anterior (HAE) and posterior endplate (HPE), ratio of anterior (RAE) and posterior endplate (RPE), the alignment of TMC, the global cervical Hounsfield Units (HU) were analyzed. Clinical results were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scoring system and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). RESULTS:Subsidence occurred in 31 of 73 (42.5%) patients. Comparison between the groups showed significant differences in the value of RAE, the alignment of TMC and the global cervical HU value (p < 0.001, p = 0.002, p < 0.001). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, RAE > 1.18 (OR = 6.116, 95%CI = 1.613-23.192, p = 0.008), alignment of TMC > 3° (OR = 5.355, 95%CI = 1.474-19.454, p = 0.011) and the global cervical HU value< 333 (OR = 11.238, 95%CI = 2.844-44.413, p = 0.001) were independently associated with subsidence. Linear regression analysis revealed that RAE is significantly positive related to the extent of subsidence (r = - 0.502, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION:Our findings suggest that the value of RAE more than 1.18, alignment of TMC and poor bone mineral density are the risk factors for subsidence. TMC subsidence does not negatively affect the clinical outcomes after operation. Avoiding over expansion of intervertebral height, optimizing placing of TMC and initiation of anti-osteoporosis treatments 6 months prior to surgery might help surgeons to reduce subsidence after ACCF.
| S-EPMC6961320 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDisparities in neurosurgical care have emerged as an area of interest when considering the impact of social determinants on access to health care. Decompression via anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for cervical stenosis (CS) may prevent progression towards debilitating complications that may severely compromise one's quality of life. This retrospective database analysis aims to elucidate demographic and socioeconomic trends in ACDF provision and outcomes of CS-related pathologies.MethodsThe Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample database was queried between 2016 and 2019 using International Classification of Diseases 10th edition codes for patients undergoing ACDF as a treatment for spinal cord and nerve root compression. Baseline demographics and inpatient stay measures were analyzed.ResultsPatients of White race were significantly less likely to present with manifestations of CS such as myelopathy, plegia, and bowel-bladder dysfunction. Meanwhile, Black patients and Hispanic patients were significantly more likely to experience these impairments representative of the more severe stages of the degenerative spine disease process. White race conferred a lesser risk of complications such as tracheostomy, pneumonia, and acute kidney injury in comparison to non-white race. Insurance by Medicaid and Medicare conferred significant risks in terms of more advanced disease prior to intervention and negative inpatient. Patients in the highest quartile of median income consistently fared better than patients in the lowest quartile across almost every aspect ranging from degree of progression at initial presentation to incidence of complications to healthcare resource utilization. All outcomes for patients age > 65 were worse than patients who were younger at the time of the intervention.ConclusionsSignificant disparities exist in the trajectory of CS and the risks associated with ACDF amongst various demographic cohorts. The differences between patient populations may be reflective of a larger additive burden for certain populations, especially when considering patients' intersectionality.
| S-EPMC10192645 | biostudies-literature